2022 (10) TMI 621 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy of appeal - Detention of goods belonging to the petitioner - mismatch of the company s name in the tax invoice - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The issues raised in this writ petition have to be dealt with basing on the factual aspects. Since the Statute provides an appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, the petitioner can as well avail the same. The Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of appeal, under Section 107 of the GST Act before Joint Commissioner concerned.

Summary

Issues:
1. Detention of goods due to mismatch in company name on tax invoice.
2. Allegation of illegal, arbitrary action by the 3rd respondent.
3. Violation of principles of natural justice in detaining goods and imposing penalty.

Analysis:
The writ petition was filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in detaining goods and collecting a penalty as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of natural justice. The petitioner, engaged in the business of Bitumen products, had goods detained at a check-post due to a mismatch in the company name on the tax invoice. The petitioner contended that the abbreviation "BITCOL" used in the invoice referred to the same entity as "Bitumen Corporation India Private Limited." The petitioner argued that proper procedures under the GST Act were not followed, and a notice explaining the seizure reasons was not provided. The counter filed by the 3rd respondent stated that the vehicle was detained due to improper details in the tax invoice and a mismatch in the buyer's name. The respondent issued a notice proposing a penalty, which was paid by the petitioner, leading to the release of the goods and conveyance.

The petitioner, despite paying the penalty, challenged the seizure and penalty imposition through the writ petition. The Government Pleader suggested that the petitioner should appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act to address factual aspects related to the detention and penalty payment. The court emphasized the availability of an appeal process under the GST Act and directed the petitioner to pursue the alternative remedy of appeal before the Joint Commissioner concerned. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of, with no order as to costs. The judgment highlighted the importance of addressing the issues raised through the statutory appeal process, considering the factual complexities involved in the case.